Sony Wants to Work with Nintendo on 3D #1 at Nintendo Cubed3

Sony is dabbling with 3D games in the latest changes for the PS3, but isn't so happy with Nintendo's insistance on the no glasses approach.

Speaking to IGN this week, Shuhei Yoshida expressed some distaste in what Nintendo continually stated at this year's E3: "There's no need for glasses when playing games on the 3DS".

He admits the approaches to 3D output are similar to Nintendo's, but "they (Nintendo) don't have to bash some small part of what the other company (Sony) is doing." Sony's high definition experience, starting with a handful of games and updated PS3 firmware, requires glasses to view the images on a high-end television set.

If you really want a big theater experience, of course you have to wear glasses. With the latest technology, the glasses are light and you kind of forget you're wearing them after awhile.

Yoshida did admit that regardless of not yet sampling the 3DS, that he wants to work closely with Nintendo in getting the technology better known for games and help advance 3D games across the industry.

Share this article

About Jorge Ba-oh

Comment on this article

Comments on this Article

«s previous12 next »

SuperLink on 01.07.2010 at 21:09#1

Sounds like pure unadulterated jealousy to me.

Even if it isn't, just the way he acts about Nintendo's use of 3D kinda gives off a "geez I wish Nintendo would tell us how they do that without glasses because it's pissing me off" kinda vibe.

From what I've heard the 3D experience offered by 3DTV isn't nearly as impressive as that of 3D in the cinema either.

( Edited 27.01.2013 04:27 by Guest )

Twitter | C3 Moderator | Backloggery

Geowolf (guest) on 01.07.2010 at 21:17#2

The circumstances are different for both devices both have technologies incompatible in the other's area. However, on the 3D TV front. I've examined them all and the only manufacturer that has produced a 3D TV of merit, in my opinion, is Panasonic and their plasma 3d TV. This is for a multitude of reasons.

1. The picture quality is brighter with greater clarity and depth;
2. They give two pairs of glasses free with the TV;
3. They're the only manufacturer who has produced 3D glasses adequately capable of slipping over my own prescription specs.

This is the real issue with glasses technology. A vast majority of people already wear glasses. For 3D glasses technology to work you have to either figure out how to integrate the technology, comfortably, with the existing specs. Or, provide prescription based 3D glasses at the same price as the non-prescription 3D glasses.

Additionally, this technology is held back by the absence of glasses compatibility between brands.

The 3DS, while only useful for one person at a time, allows the use of existing specs.

3D at the cost of blurry HD isn't a worthwhile pay off for me, and, anyone with specs who has tried to wear the 3D glasses over them will know that it is quite sore after awhile as both glasses rub against each other and your skin.

( Edited 27.01.2013 04:27 by Guest )

meeto_0 on 01.07.2010 at 21:24#3

I think everyone in the industry know how to do glasses free 3D on a small handheld. Furthermore with Sony having a larger R&D department they are almost always more likely to produce better results. This goes for any tech they decide to imitate.

But Sony should get real. They are pushing expensive TVs and then want you to fork out ��£100 for glasses. A 2.5 typical family means ��£400 for glasses or ��£500 if the dog is getting a pair. All this so you can watch monsters vs aliens or replay wipeout.

Nintendo is responding to public criticism. No one wants glasses. Sony and panny and samsung are trying to convince public joe they do want to wear glasses to reinject money into a stalling industry.

But what I cant understand is why Sony wants nintendo to be respectful and polite when for the past 5yrs Sony has insulted nintendo after every innovation before deciding to imitate it.

The latest I believe was 'Sony doesnt think little 8-9yr olds care about 3d. So it seems pointless bringing this to the DS.' Possibly one of the worlds most ironic statements ever made. Trash talk should be left to camp wrestlers of the WWF

( Edited 27.01.2013 04:27 by Guest )

PK Mongoose on 01.07.2010 at 21:35#4

"So, basically, ours doesn't use glasses."
"Well, you don't have to be so mean about it!"
"Ok...Well, we're just getting across that it's a little easier on the eyes and a little less troublesome without the glasses."
"Well...we'll show you! Our glasses will be 1000x better than any shit effects YOU could come up with!"

Is what I'm hearing.

( Edited 27.01.2013 04:27 by Guest )

It requires great courage to look at oneself honestly, and forge one's own path.

gatotsu911 on 01.07.2010 at 22:03#5

Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, WHOA. SONY is upset over Nintendo bashing THEM???

It's like that smug kid in middle school who always mocks everybody else, but then when someone gives him a taste of his own medicine, he runs away crying.

( Edited 01.07.2010 17:05 by gatotsu911 )

Darkflame on 01.07.2010 at 22:14#6

Both methods have pro's and con's.
Paralax barrier is glass's free, but with reduced viewing angle and can only realy work with one person.

Glass's have any viewing angle, and work with multiple people at once.

However, the problem with Sony's method is not the fact it use's glass's. Its the fact they demand you to buy a new TV -and- spend $100ish on glass's per person.
These glass's being shutter-glass's that need their own power source too.
This is old tech. Ive had e-dimensional shutter glass's on my pc for over a decade!

If they are demanding new tv's anyway they should develop pass-polarised techniques. This is what Imax screens use, and use cheap, flicker-free glass's.
More more reliable and cheaper for the same result.

This is the real issue with glasses technology. A vast majority of people already wear glasses. For 3D glasses technology to work you have to either figure out how to integrate the technology, comfortably, with the existing specs. Or, provide prescription based 3D glasses at the same price as the non-prescription 3D glasses.

Which is another reason why passive polarised 3d is much more suitable consumer tech.

Please give our little random review show a try;
http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html
We have special effects and umm...stuff...

GreythaGreat on 01.07.2010 at 22:14#7

Did they really just go there?!

How many times does Sony end up bashing Nintendo in a not so obvious way about it's lack of hardcore titles? Or Nintendo's focus on casual gamers? And then Sony completely copies the Wiimote/ Nunchuck.

I think it's high-time Nintendo comments on the lack of Sony's creativity and how they have no moral standards as a company.

"Do a Barrel Roll!"

'tendo on 01.07.2010 at 22:19#8

hell yea it's jealousy.

sony is just upset cause nintendo figured out how to do 3D w/o the glasses.

which if can be successfully mimicked for TV's.

no need for glasses at all!

there is a way, nintendo has done it's part, now it's up to tv manufacturers to do the same.

3D Tv won't be successful unless made affordable for everyone...otherwise it will stay a movie theare experience.

TAG on 01.07.2010 at 22:43#9

Hey Sony, I don't want to wear glasses every time I watch TV. Just so you know.

I plan to stick with my 2D TV until they create a 3D experience without the need of glasses or any other unusual hardware (like the 3DS). 3D is fun, but to me, it's not worth having to wear glasses to watch TV (that's not even considering the extra monetary cost).

If glasses never go away, I honestly hope 3D dies. I don't want 3D to become the only way to watch TV and then I am forced to wear glasses or not watch TV at all. This is my preemptive old man rant.

TAG: That American Guy

"If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone." Romans 12:18

Uzi Suicide on 01.07.2010 at 22:51#10

The latest I believe was 'Sony doesnt think little 8-9yr olds care about 3d. So it seems pointless bringing this to the DS.' Possibly one of the worlds most ironic statements ever made. Trash talk should be left to camp wrestlers of the WWF

True, then Nintendo advices young children not to use 3D as muscles in their eyes arent fully developed.
Sounds like Sony need to do more research if they wanna work on a level with the pioneers in gaming that Nintendo are.

Poor Sony, youve left yourselves completely exposed with your nose wide open, you should have kept a poker face then the rest of the industry wouldnt have gotten suss.

I can hear the patting of executive backs in Nintendo HQ from here.

Jump_button on 01.07.2010 at 22:56#11

glasses are not that of a thing and 3D only add it not like its the next big thing it just adds

we all know big screen tv you need glasses and i think big N doing the right thing it easy to do on a little screen and only you playing it

but with a big tv not every one can be in the sweet spot

My ART Gallery la la la la!

Darkflame on 01.07.2010 at 23:07#12

If glasses never go away, I honestly hope 3D dies. I don't want 3D to become the only way to watch TV and then I am forced to wear glasses or not watch TV at all. This is my preemptive old man rant.

What happens if you become short/far sited?

Please give our little random review show a try;
http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html
We have special effects and umm...stuff...

EdEN on 01.07.2010 at 23:14#13

Nope, you cannot forget that you are in fact wearing the glasses. I go to watch a 3D movie every now and then but the glasses are always in my mind.

Keven on 02.07.2010 at 00:05#14

To be honest, 1-3 hours is about all the 3D I can take. After that, my eyes just start to become tired.

The former top user was Keven! You'd probably give birth to yourself 1000 times over until you sprout wings to fly away into the fading sun, that or you'd just turn into a lesbian. Who knows @_@ - L, 12/06/09

justonesp00lturn on 02.07.2010 at 00:09#15

Lol. "You can't feel like you're in a theater without glasses!" Smilie

I don't think Nintendo was going for the movie theater experience or multiple users at once. With their handheld, portable system. But I guess I could be wrong?

As much as I'd like to buy a $300 PS3, a $60 3D game, the $1200 TV and $200 glasses, I think I'd rather just go ahead and get a 3DS. It'll have better games anyway.

It's nice that both companies are working to advance the technology, but Sony is really over-talking their role in it. There's nothing revolutionary about copying the movie theater experience point-by-point. Bringing the same methods to a new area isn't really as much of an advancement of technology as creating and implementing a new technology altogether.

NNID: crackedthesky
My blog, mostly about writing: http://davidjlovato.wordpress.com

justonesp00lturn on 02.07.2010 at 00:13#16

hell yea it's jealousy.
sony is just upset cause nintendo figured out how to do 3D w/o the glasses.
which if can be successfully mimicked for TV's.
no need for glasses at all!
there is a way, nintendo has done it's part, now it's up to tv manufacturers to do the same.
3D Tv won't be successful unless made affordable for everyone...otherwise it will stay a movie theare experience.

They can't do no-glasses 3D on a TV because it depends entirely on the angle of the viewer. Accomplishing everyone in a room having the exact same angle of viewing a TV is pretty much not possible.

NNID: crackedthesky
My blog, mostly about writing: http://davidjlovato.wordpress.com

SuperLink on 02.07.2010 at 01:27#17

justonesp00lturn said:
They can't do no-glasses 3D on a TV because it depends entirely on the angle of the viewer. Accomplishing everyone in a room having the exact same angle of viewing a TV is pretty much not possible.

Usually I would agree, but give it a decade or two. When we have fully working holograms people would laugh at things like that. Smilie

The rate of technology improves at an incredible rate afterall~

Twitter | C3 Moderator | Backloggery

justonesp00lturn on 02.07.2010 at 02:15#18

SuperLink said:
justonesp00lturn said:
They can't do no-glasses 3D on a TV because it depends entirely on the angle of the viewer. Accomplishing everyone in a room having the exact same angle of viewing a TV is pretty much not possible.

Usually I would agree, but give it a decade or two. When we have fully working holograms people would laugh at things like that.
The rate of technology improves at an incredible rate afterall~

I was talking in the PS3 generation. I'm sure they'll come up with something in the future.
My guess is it'll involve a convex screen.

NNID: crackedthesky
My blog, mostly about writing: http://davidjlovato.wordpress.com

PMD on 02.07.2010 at 02:19#19

Well, before holograms, I think that the viewing angle/head tracking for 3D TV's will improve to the point that multiple people will be able to watch 3D television without glasses.

I doubt holograms will ever be used for 3D viewing, since consumer technology rarely progresses towards sci-fi elements.

Sonic_13 on 02.07.2010 at 04:26#20

justonesp00lturn said:
hell yea it's jealousy.
sony is just upset cause nintendo figured out how to do 3D w/o the glasses.
which if can be successfully mimicked for TV's.
no need for glasses at all!
there is a way, nintendo has done it's part, now it's up to tv manufacturers to do the same.
3D Tv won't be successful unless made affordable for everyone...otherwise it will stay a movie theare experience.
They can't do no-glasses 3D on a TV because it depends entirely on the angle of the viewer. Accomplishing everyone in a room having the exact same angle of viewing a TV is pretty much not possible.

3D TVs without the need for glasses already exist.

justonesp00lturn on 02.07.2010 at 11:06#21

Sonic_13 said:
justonesp00lturn said:
hell yea it's jealousy.
sony is just upset cause nintendo figured out how to do 3D w/o the glasses.
which if can be successfully mimicked for TV's.
no need for glasses at all!
there is a way, nintendo has done it's part, now it's up to tv manufacturers to do the same.
3D Tv won't be successful unless made affordable for everyone...otherwise it will stay a movie theare experience.
They can't do no-glasses 3D on a TV because it depends entirely on the angle of the viewer. Accomplishing everyone in a room having the exact same angle of viewing a TV is pretty much not possible.
3D TVs without the need for glasses already exist.

Then they aren't made for more than one person to watch at a time.

NNID: crackedthesky
My blog, mostly about writing: http://davidjlovato.wordpress.com

Squidboy on 02.07.2010 at 12:53#22

Reggie knew it would piss them off, they way he stressed it implied as much

3DS Code 2578-3122-0744

meeto_0 on 02.07.2010 at 22:35#23

To be honest 3D doesnt really get me excited that much. I feel like one of those old people that are against progression. 3D has yet to get me excited.

You know what really excites me about the 3DS its the processing power and third party support combined.
Processing power allows for certain genres to thrive more: FPS, third person action adventure games, sport.

Al (guest) on 03.07.2010 at 02:04#24

Technically, the PS3 doesn't need glasses for 3D, just the current TVs that display it. A glasses free TV could do 3D PS3 without glasses.
Personally, I find it hard to find the remote for watching my current TV, there's no way anyone could find all the extra accessories. Also, I wouldn't want to pay an extra �£500 just to have a few mates over to watch TV or play games, it does seem silly.

Sonic_13 on 03.07.2010 at 02:31#25

justonesp00lturn said:
Sonic_13 said:
justonesp00lturn said:
hell yea it's jealousy.
sony is just upset cause nintendo figured out how to do 3D w/o the glasses.
which if can be successfully mimicked for TV's.
no need for glasses at all!
there is a way, nintendo has done it's part, now it's up to tv manufacturers to do the same.
3D Tv won't be successful unless made affordable for everyone...otherwise it will stay a movie theare experience.
They can't do no-glasses 3D on a TV because it depends entirely on the angle of the viewer. Accomplishing everyone in a room having the exact same angle of viewing a TV is pretty much not possible.
3D TVs without the need for glasses already exist.
Then they aren't made for more than one person to watch at a time.

Actually Intel's glasses free TV's has eight possible viewpoints (thus at least eight people could watch it at once).

http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/10/intel-shows-off-glasses-free-3d-demo-now-this-is-more-like-it/